Management h Performance asearch Ssearchs Shavingcutebaresexslaves e Management Performance esearchfsearchrsearchacsearch search1sae Management e Management ersearchh Performance h Siste v Top nsearchc Performance te Performance asearchessearchx Top l Siste v Performance s Shavingcutebaresexslaves t1asearchd Performance ms Top searchosearchm Shavingcutebaresexslaves t Management e Shavingcutebaresexslaves searchr0 Management e Siste f Siste re1s

On the thread about how you'd make your own porn film, several people listed how they wanted to have actors who were more committed and better sexual performers (more into it) more than anything else. I wonder who people think are the best at this--not necessarily the best looking or the most attractive, but the most into their scenes. Two never-fail guys for me are Adam Killian and Matt Cole. They are almost always hard, and they always seem like they're deeply into their partners when they perform and are 100% committed. Killian, in particular, amazes me--he seems to get completely that every second he's on camera he's got to be putting on the best show possible. He knows how to show off his body to his best advantage all the time, and he also knows how to focus entirely on his scene partner.

I think it looks childish and immature. All that large font and bolded text makes it look so unprofessional.

A few years ago a good friend sent me a few intriguing articles from this site, and it has changed my perspective on the banking crisis, the wars, the attacks on civil liberties and the Internet, and the profound amount of information "noise" (aka flat out lies) that come out of the mouths of the empty talking heads on TV. The basic premise is that a group of very wealthy, very powerful, and very interconnected families- no more than a few thousand people together via marriage, business deals, and/or shared interests- control the mechanisms of banking (fairly obvious), government (somewhat obvious), big business (obvious if you pay attention) and education and media (far less obvious, unless explicitly pointed out). These families/cabals/whatever can subtly (or not so subtly, as in the case of KONY, or the Tea Party, or OWS, etc.)  shape the public narrative (Hegelian dialectic) in a way that prevents the majority (be they "left" or "right" or "conservative" or "liberal" or "green") from ever focusing on the larger issues. That way they can keep "the little people" fighting over trivial matters while they steal our money, our land, our civil rights and our future. If you're fighting about gay marriage and abortion, then trillion dollar wars and massive bank bailouts are off the radar. I have finally become convinced, after the latest bullshit on Greece, Osama, the TSA/PATRIOT ACT/NDAA debacles that this guy is right. 

Dominant Social Themes...are they real?

I took a bite of key lime pie and my throat immediately got sore and no it's painful to swallow. Has this ever happened to anyone else?

Dyke, right? She's got looks, strength, and a ticket to London to run in the Olympics. So what is track & field star Lori "Lolo" Jones missing? A steady boyfriend. She's been looking online – with every online dating service out there, reports HBO's Real Sports with Bryant Gumbel – and has had the most luck on Twitter, she says. Although not that much luck. Holding back the 29-year-old in her quest, possibly, is the fact that she recently Tweeted that she is a virgin. "It's something, a gift I want to give my husband," she says on an episode of the pay-cable program to air May 22. "This journey has been hard," she continues. "It's the hardest thing I've ever done in my life. Harder than training for the Olympics. Harder than studying for college has been staying a virgin before marriage." She admits, "I've been tempted. I've had guys tell me … 'Hey, you know, if you have sex, it'll help you run faster.' " Only Jones didn't buy that suggestion, despite how much she wants the gold medal. "If you marry me," she quips on the show, "then yeah."

Olympic Runner Lolo Jones - still a virgin at age 29

05/24/2012 New data from an NBC-Wall Street Journal poll that show President Obama leading former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney by 34 points among Hispanics set off a new round of speculation about whether Republicans can win in November if they can’t narrow that margin. And rightfully so. But focusing just on 2012 actually underestimates the depth of the political problem for Republicans when it comes to the Hispanic community. In short: Republicans’ Hispanic problem didn’t happen overnight and they won’t be able to fix it overnight either. That means that regardless of what happens in 2012, Republicans need to find ways to begin growing their support among Hispanics, or they run the risk of struggling to build majority national coalitions in 2016, 2020 and beyond. The following two charts illustrate Republicans’ long-term Hispanic problem. Let’s break each of them down. The first chart details how the Hispanic vote has split between the two parties in the last 10 presidential contests. On average, the Democratic presidential nominee has received 64.1 percent of the Hispanic vote, while the Republican nominee has taken just 31.8 percent. Take out the 2004 result — where President George W. Bush won 44 percent in an exit polling finding that is heavily disputed by many Latino groups — and the Democratic presidential nominee averaged 65.3 percent among Latinos, while the GOP standard-bearer won just 30.4 percent of their votes. Here’s the full readout on how Hispanics have voted for president since 1972: (SEE CHART) The second chart details the growth of the Hispanic vote as a proportion of the overall electorate. While it remains true that Hispanics are neither registered to vote nor turn out to vote in anything close to commensurate with their size in the overall U.S. population, Latinos’ percentage of the entire electorate has increased in each of the past four elections and is now more than four times as high as it was in 1992. Here’s the chart detailing the rising percentage of Latinos as a portion of the overall electorate: (SEE CHART) Combine the two charts and you see the trouble for the GOP. Not only has the party demonstrated little to no ability to win anything even close to a majority of Hispanic voters in any presidential election dating back almost 40 years, but Latinos are also comprising an ever-larger slice of the electorate — with a considerable jump between 1992 (2 percent) and 2008 (9 percent). Given that reality, simply putting a Hispanic Republican — Florida Sen. Marco Rubio, perhaps? — on the national ticket this fall shouldn’t be considered a panacea (or anything close to it) for all that ails Republicans when it comes to Hispanic voters. But, if Republicans don’t start somewhere — and fast — they could be relegated to permanent minority status (or close to it) in 2016 and beyond. The short-term politics of the Hispanic vote are bad for Republicans. The long-term politics are downright disastrous.

Republicans’ Hispanic problem — in 2 charts

2012%20Poll%20Troll

In nearly six weeks, Romney has done four other national TV interviews -- CNN, CNBC, ABC and CBS--two of which were joint interviews with his wife, Ann Romney.

Mitt Romney Flocks To Fox News As General Election Season Ramps Up

As more and more people wake up to the fact that everything they post on FB is the property of FB, I believe they will flee this web site. It's simply a data collection site and their "keeping people connected" theme is simply a delivery system for data. I believe the downside of FB will be proven to be devastating for many if not all members. I'd be interested in comments that may not agree with my opinion.

Add her to the list of people who need to go away.

Kate Gosselin can't believe networks won't give her a new show

Make the RHONJ look like graduates of Miss Porter''s.

"Mob Wives" on VH1

Teresa "Bitsy" Giudice

Like to hear it, here it go... Still haven't read any of the DCnU books yet. I've collected a few and am waiting til I get about 5 or 6 issues in before I decide to commit.